As you know, I have zero tolerance for Republicans who trash talk Sarah Palin. Three years of Palin Derangement Syndrome have made me allergic; Palin stands apart from other Republican candidates in that regard.

There is only one candidate in the Republican field whose campaign staff has used trash talking Sarah Palin as a campaign strategy.

Michelle Bachmann and/or her senior staff have decided that the path to short-term success is to insult Palin and to present Bachmann as the only viable alternative to establishment Republicans.

First it was Ed Rollins publicly insulting Palin almost at the very moment Bachmann announced her run; at the time I left open the possibility that Rollins had gone rogue, but Bachmann herself never made it right and Rollins still is the brains behind her campaign.

Next was this report of what is going on in the run up to the Iowa straw poll:

“I like Sarah Palin a lot,” Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said at Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate. “We are very good friends.” …

But a personal relationship between the conservative female leaders has, in fact, been nonexistent for the past 16 months, as aides from Bachmann’s camps have privately — and sometimes publicly — disparaged Palin to an extent that has caused growing exasperation in Palin world. That behind-the-scenes rancor is now boiling over as the former Alaska governor inches closer to a presidential run.

Some of the volunteers who have been organizing here in the nation’s first voting state for a potential Palin campaign have been particularly miffed by what they describe as a concerted effort from the Bachmann camp to spread rumors that Palin has already decided not to run and will eventually endorse the Minnesotan.

“It is so pervasive and so continuous that it can’t be rogue people doing it without the understanding and encouragement from the candidate herself,” a Palin supporter in Iowa told RCP. “The entire Bachmann team has gone around the state saying Palin is a lightweight and a quitter and saying that Sarah’s about to endorse Michele. Bachmann’s campaign is radioactively dirty. They are shameless.”

In the whispering campaign against Palin, Bachmann likely picked up some supporters who were hoping for better but figuring Bachmann was the best they could get.

Michele Bachmann is entitled to run her campaign any way she wants, and using typical Ed Rollins tactics is her perogative.

But millions of Palin supporters — some of whom support her for President, others of whom merely support her because of what she stands for and has gone through — are entitled to take Bachmann’s campaign tactics into account when choosing a “Plan B” should Palin decide not to run. Michelle Bachmann has spit on those supporters at her political peril.

For me, Plan B means anyone but Bachmann. And it is enough to finally get me motivated for the primaries.

Bachmann’s attacks on Pawlenty during the Republican presidential candidates’ debate this week were almost entirely false and demagogic. Those of us who admire her can’t help but think less of her as a result.

And, some more thoughts by me:

Bachmann had one and only one path to the nomination – to unite the 25%-35% of the party who do not want an establishment Republican (not even a “conservative” establishment Republican). The path existed only if Bachmann established herself as a viable candidate on her own and brought with her a coalition which included Palin supporters. Uniting the base not dividing the base should have been Bachmann’s goal.

Instead Bachmann viewed Palin entering the race as a threat and therefore decided that attacking Palin through surrogates was the best tactic, but that was myopic. If Palin enters the race, Bachmann is done regardless of anything Bachmann did or didn’t do; but if Palin does not enter the race Bachmann could have had the chance to lead the coalition. That chance is gone because Bachmann destroyed the coalition, or at least her ability to lead it.

Bachmann will not be the nominee, regardless of whether Palin runs, and Bachmann has no one to blame but herself.

Comments

Bachmann does not have enough experience. This is a label the media tried to pin on Palin but in Bachmann’s case, it is true. I cannot imagine why she thinks she is qualified to be President of the United States after serving only in the house a few years and has no foreign policy knowledge. I guess she watched obama sprint from obscurity with no record and thinks she can imitate him. Or maybe it is a case of over inflated ego like the present occupant. Just what we need…another narcissist in the WH. However, wiser heads will probably not prevail. This is a country hooked on American Idol candidates.

I like Bachman, but I have pretty much gone by what used to be the norm in the GOP, speak not ill of other Republicans…I’m not sure I can support her. I won’t vote for her in the primary, but would if she’s the nominee, if only because the alternative would be four more years of hopeless change.

That being said, the GOP leadership is part and parcel of the problems we’re facing today. The “Debt Ceiling Deal” “cuts spending”…NOT! It only cuts “future growth” of government. It does nothing about the mess we are in today. That’s why S&P downgraded the bond rating. The GOP leadership has spent the past 50 years “going along to get along” instead of offering real leadership on spending or the deficit.

The only way to not go the way of the PIIGS of Europe is to return to the 2006 budget, and cut THAT by 30% (that’s the last GOP Congressional budget–since then, Democrats have added 1/3rd to the national debt, some $4.7 billion dollars). That’s the only way to crawl out of the hole this nation is now in…but our “political elite” won’t do this because with smaller government has less chance for graft and corruption.

Bless you professor. I thought that you would eventually arrive at this deduction.

Bachmann’s supporters have been telling Iowans that “The Palin supporters in Iowa were told NOT to spend any more of their own money on the groundwork there. That SarahPac has advised Organize for Palin in Iowa to stop and that it is appreciated, however, out of an abundance of concern, it is not in their best financial intersts to continue their efforts. Ya’ll just might as well stop, because we are beginning to feel guilty, and we have no intent.”

THEY ARE DESPICABLE. Typical Ed Rollins dirty politics.

Bachmann’s supporters are calling Palin “an opportunist who is working to gather funds for SarahPac alone. That as soon as word gets out about Palin not running, contributions to her PAC will dry up. The only reason her PAC pulls in the big $$$ is because people think of it as her campaign fund.”

I have contacted Peter Singleton the head of Organizing for Palin in Iowa and he has advise that this is not true and it shows their desperation.

I am all out anyone but Michele “Ed Rollins” Bachmann. I have never seen such despicable backstabbing politics in my life.

Sorry but Michele Bachmann is sick. Loyalty is important to me. Sarah answered Michele’s call when Pelosi put a target on her back. Is this the way Michele repays her.

I suggest you contact Peter Singleton at Organize for Palin yourself. He is extremely approachable. He had lunch with Palin while she was there and will be able to answer all of your questions.

The irony is Bachmann is the opportunist. Last fall Bachmann campaigned around the nation raising a lot of money for her congressional race. Her race was not even close but she took a lot of money away from more needy candidates.
She lied and demagogued about Pawlenty in the debates. She has no ideas and no accomplishments. In many ways, she is the antithesis of Obama. That may be enough for some folks to vote for her, it isn’t enough to win or be a good POTUS. We Conservatives need to do better.

As to Ed Rollins. This is the same guy who bragged about paying off Black churches not to vote for Florio in the NJ Governor’s race against his gal Christie Todd Whitman in 1993. He is a real piece of work and so is his candidate.
I am sitting this primary season out and observe until the herd thins out even more. I will drink a toast the day Bachmann is toast.

Bye, bye, Bachmann. With Ed Rollins on your side, you will eventually become an Establishment candidate, which we do not need right now. I’ve been up for grabs and still am, but the list of “no way” is growing. Pawlenty’s decision to quit is a wise one — and there’s no way his supporters will swing to Bachmann. You had your moment in the sun, Rep. Bachmann. Enjoy it. The ride will soon be over.

I’ve just generally had a bad feeling about Bachmann; I’ve even complained to my husband because I don’t have a good reason to dislike her, I just…don’t. I can rattle off reasons why I don’t like or trust Perry with ease, but I think I’d sooner vote for him.

Possibly I don’t like her because the same instincts that tell me when not to trust a female co-worker are telling me not to trust her; from the tactics you’ve pointed out, that would fit.

Again, at the risk of being tarred and feathered by the Palin true believers, I am wearing a bit thin with Sarah playing to coy coquette. This is a presidental race that will be the dirtiest since the press called Andrew Jackson’s wife, Rachel, a prostitute.

Sarah needs to get in if she is going to get in. All these “well, I’m thinking about but I want to let people chose another candidate in case I don’t get in” is just so much bull.

Sarah needs more than just Sarah PAC. She will need big donors and bundlers that can compete with the financial leviathan that Obama is building. And while I have no doubt that Sarah would make a good president (ABO) I don’t like all this dithering.

And what’s with the bashing of the citizens of another GOP candidates state? Sarah tried to walk that back a bit, but it landed with a thud. Disagree with the other candidates, that’s all fair game, but don’t slam their state’s citizens.

Okay, well the whole “Sarah as coy coquette” comment is getting old and is sexist, to boot. You continue to jump on her. I am not a huge Palin “believer” as you say, but the whole “coquette” thing stinks to high heaven.

Bachmann is a disappointment. I had just started to like her.

But actually, IMHO, just look at Jammie today and you’ll see that she’s had her Dukakis/tank or Dean/scream moment.

A corndog has done her in. I’m sorry to be so shallow but this is it. The Dean/ scream.

Pull your Hanes out of your rear. I was not insulting Palin, but if you can’t understand that, I guess you can think whatever your pathetic grade school education gave you.

Since you are unaware of what “coquette” is, I suggest you look it up. And what is Sarah doing, if not constantly teasing. How is she being anything less than coy? Or is that a word you don’t completely comprehend, as well? Actually, referring to a woman as a “coquette” was a literary compliment.

I would like to see her win but she can’t build a mountain of cash that it will take if all the bundlers are already taken. You may have bought into that whole “single donor” crap put out by Obama, but it doesn’t work that way.

The rules of the game changed when Obama was elected to the Senate and immediatly started positioning himself for a run for the gold. Campaigns are now kicking off almost a full two years before the election. And it is not going to be to Sarah’s advantage to not have the time to build the campaign war chest that is going to be required.

My, my, aren’t we testy. Of course, bragging about your knowledge of a word doesn’t reveal to you the blatant sexism of your comment. My, my. Being a coquette is SEXUAL in nature, as most literate people know. Once again, a beautiful woman is being accused of being a SEXUAL tease to get attention, mainly from MALES.

I suggest you look “coquette” up in the dictionary. And you accuse me of being “test” after claiming I made a “sexist” remark? Sorry, you don’t get to sling manure without having some on your own hands.

What I would suggest is that you grow up, stop using “sexist” as a perjorative against someone you don’t agree with and realize it makes you sound like a liberal who is trying to play a trump card.

coquette: a woman who flirts lightheartedly with men to win their admiration and affection; flirt.

That is, to imply that she’s playing lightheartedly with MEN. Sexist.

Did it occur to you that she could be waiting for the field to narrow? Waiting to see, AS SHE SAID, if she is needed because who would want to put their family through that? And she, of all people, should know what that’s like?

Now that I think of it, you sound just like that establishment RINO Kathleen Parker, who repeatedly called her a “tease” today.

Tea Party at Perrysville, perhaps you could have listed the dictionary you took your definition from, as I did.

Have you never heard the term “flirting with danger?” How do you derive a sexual connotation from that? Is everything “sexual” with you? If you continue to apply only “sexist” meanings to anything and everything said about ANY woman, you are going to lead a very frustrated life.

You sound more like a Paulbot than the rational Palin supporters I know.

I’m not going to tar & feather anyone but it confuses me when people harp about Palin “dithering” about entering the race.

I guess there is a date that a candidate has to declare their candidacy in order to get on primary ballots but where is it written that a potential candidate HAS TO throw their hat earlier than that or even campaign in all states? Seems like some ststes have an over-inflated opinion of their own significance in electoral politics. Now I grant that entering early may help for those who need name recognition or fund raising visibility but I imagine that is based on how they see their needs/shortcomings.

People act like they KNOW what the woman is thinking because that is how many past candidates have thought/acted. I do think Palin marches to a different drum. Now that may hurt her chances of being the nominee because potential supporters may commit to other candidates but it seems to me like that she is the one to decide if she wants to risk that.

katiejane, there is only ONE question that any potential candidate askes: Can I raise the money for a long campaign competitive with my opponents? That’s it. Without the funding, and funding from financial heavyweights both individual and PACs, you can’t win.

The longer a candidate waits, the less chance they have for grabbing up the financial heavy hitters.

Thank you so much for your concern. The Governor remains convinced that she will be able to raise at least a dollar fifty, maybe even two whole dollars, no matter when she enters the race. Your solicitude has been noted.

Look, I want Palin to declare as much as any of you political junkies, from my POV mainly so I can start working for her candidacy. God! We’ve had this fool in office for SO LONG NOW! I’m champing at the bit to DO SOMETHING, but when I step back and look at it objectively, I can’t see any reason for her to jump in any earlier than she absolutely has to. Money? You’re joking,right? She’ll raise tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars the first month she’s official. Staff? A point, but a minor one. She has staff all over the place, just biding their time, and this objection is more a creation of the professional political operative class then anything else, looking to ensure that they have jobs. Mon Dieu! Palin waited too long, and now she’s deprived of the most excellent services of Ed Rollins! Excuse me while I don’t slit my wrists in despair. They’re desperate because they know in their greedy little heart of hearts that 500, 5000, 5,000,000 ordinary citizens working from their kitchen tables render them superfluous, and that’s the army that’s waiting for Palin to give the word.

OTOH, what’s the upside to her throwing her hat in the ring right now? Name recognition? Nobody this side of Jesus (or Obama, but as a “progressive” would say, I repeat myself)needs it less. Position? Dude, we’re talking about her incessantly, and she’s not even in yet!

No, the only thing that happens when she declares is that she becomes target number one, yet again, for the driveby media. Even though she’s weathered it magnificently for the past few years, it can’t be any fun, I don’t blame her for putting it off as long as possible. Strategically, waiting makes sense because the media is going to use their venom on the other candidates, and if it turns out that Perry kept a llama in indentured servitude or Bachmann claims that she once flew to Jupiter on the tail of a unicorn to consult with Jesus, Buddha and Charles Nelson Reilly on energy policy, well, so much the better for Palin.

In short, I see absolutely no upside for Palin jumping in now, and considerable potential negatives. Other than scratching the itch to GET ON WITH IT ALREADY amongst us political junkies, exactly what advantage to you see for Palin to declare now rather than later? She’s already avoided T-Paw by waiting, why shouldn’t she wait a bit more for others to drop out, then swoop in and crush Mitt or Michelle or duke it out mano a mano with Perry? What’s the upside for Palin to not waiting?

I must say, until this debate, I always saw Bachmann as unintelligent, but in this debate she seemed very Presidential, and knew what she was talking about. Not the normal anti-Obama rhetoric, she seemed to have a plan.

I while back I was uneasy about a Palin candidacy. I thought the media’s bashing her would be a huge distraction from the relevant issues.

I’ve changed my mind. I hope she runs. I hope she’s the nominee.

Reportedly, Obama and the Dems are planning to “kill” whoever the nominee is. What can they do to Palin that they’ve not already done? She’s flame hardened now and the public has seen and heard it all before. What’s SNL going to do, run Tina Fey reruns? Good luck with that.

As for Palin playing “coy,” well, she’s playing the press like a fiddle, getting free publicity and handling interviews like a pro. Once she announces, the troops will mobilize and it’ll be game on: us against them.

I’m getting tired of holding my nose and voting for Republican puff adders. For once, let the Republican establishment grab their nostrils and pull the lever.

You may think that Sarah is “playing the press like a fiddle” but the press has an attention span of a gnat. If she doesn’t give them some red meat, they will move on. Notice any interviews with Sarah today on Sunday news or is she relegated to twitter?

She needs to get in now. She needs the time to build her funds. She can’t jump in late in the year and think that she can do that.

I’ve been reading the running commentary (not yet finished, however) between retire05 and others and just had to jump in! Of course, I agree with those who rightly have pointed out the TRUE meaning – in history & literature – of the words “coquette” & “coy.” Suffice to say that “coquette” is rarely used in a non-sexual way, even if just describing the perceived qualities of an attractive young girl (“perceived,” of course, from the point of view of a red-blooded male…). This SO does NOT describe Sarah Palin – my God, how blind does one have to be to see that Palin is a very self-possessed woman, totally secure in her excellent marriage, who has no need for “women’s wiles” and all that nonsense. She just happens to be blessed – or cursed, depending on how one gauges one’s personal attributes – with extremely good looks AND she takes excellent care of her health and her appearance – quite a disciplined and highly organized person, IMO!

Here’s what’s going on, retire05, while you’re still grousing about her entrance into the fray: She’s building a complete campaign strategy, state by state, with a growing and impressive number of eager volunteers (Organize4palin/O4P has little “armies” in 36 states and counting…). As for the “big bucks,” news flash: NONE of the candidates to date (except, perhaps, Romney) has the so-called big donors and major bundlers. Of course, people like the Koch Brothers have not yet committed to anyone, but do you doubt for a moment that their support is virtually 100 percent assured for Palin? Ditto MANY other very wealthy iconoclastic and libertarian-oriented GOP donors.

So, you were sweatin’ the small stuff after she left Iowa and headed to the Reagan Birthplace and then the Lincoln Birthplace – granted, not the big crowds, but still the media (and SarahPAC) coverage. She’s making sure that ALL her ducks are in order before she makes the announcement. And you think the LSM have forgotten her? Lord, you ARE naive!! They are obsessed!!

OK, here’s something on which you can hang your hat: Watch the dates Aug. 29 and Sept. 3. Many “insiders” are guessing that either on one of those days or between those two dates, Palin will, indeed, announce her intention to be a candidate for POTUS. Eventually, again IMO, it’ll boil down to her and Romney – the Right & Left of the GOP – and another classic battle within the Party between Conservatives and Liberals, which, BTW, I’ve been watching since Eisenhower beat Taft (in 1952 – and Obama’s no Ike!!).

We almost had it for the Good Guys (the Conservatives) with Reagan, but his VP, George I, pissed that one away. So, it’ll be up to Palin to pick the right VP – a truly daunting, but not impossible, task. The future of this country absolutely depends on strong, committed Conservative leadership for at least a generation!

But let me give you fair warning: if Palin gets in, she can’t win without the independents. And if independents have questions, or doubts about her, you are not going to win them over by being a Palin attack dog. You are going to have to present her case with calm, and rational arguments.

To the person who said Palin was NOT at the Iowa straw poll, wrong. She was there, was on Sean Hannity’s show the night before. It does not matter that she was NOT there the day of. Perry was not there until yesterday, and he took votes, she did not.

All elections are reduced to 10 second sound bites and talking point. You are going to have to be able to answer, in 10 seconds, why Sarah quit as governor. I understand why she did it, but to an independent who views that as giving up, you can’t attack them, you have to explain, quickly, her reasons.

Let me help you out: when the feminist movement first began, it was based on a woman being capable of having it all. Well, Sarah has it all; family, career, etc. She has been Ginger Rogers in high heels doing what Fred Astair did, only backwards. If an independent tell you “Well, she is not pro-choice.” She is pro-choice, she chose life.

Again, you are NOT going to win those independents by attacking them if they are not well informed. And you are not going to win independents by attacking someone they are learning toward. The concept is to WIN them, not beat them over the head into submission.

Tell that to an independent who might not be as conservative as you but who doesn’t want to vote for Obama again. You won’t win them over, you will chase them away and lose a vote that could have, possibly, gone to Sarah.

John Donne wrote, “no man is an island”. Your kind of thinking will get you exiled to one.

The mistake many GOP primary voters are making is they are making war just against Obama. The real war is against the bureaucracies/bureaucrats, public sector unions, and unaccountable judges. Tell me where Bachmann has fought against any of those folks. She hasn’t.
I would be very interested in a Chris Christie campaign. Bachmann got away with lying about Pawlenty in the last debate. Christie would put her to shame.
Bachmann wouldn’t carry MN against Obama; Pawlenty could. Don’t let your purist thinking get in the way of a GOP victory.

“Palin’s another McCain on immigration, she’s supported DADT repeal, and she’s now goofed by saying the debt ceiling deal was a win for the Teas, which it manifestly was not.”

This is a lie. A patent manifest lie. Show your sources for any of the above lies. You can’t.

As for the debt ceiling deal, it is a win for the TP. We are the only ones who have been insisting on holding the line in the face of scaremongering tactics. Because of the debt ceiling increase, the USA’s S&P rating went down since it was all about increasing the debt and not about cutting spending as we wanted.

“Bachmann is more conservative than Palin, and politics ain’t beanbag.” Stupid statement. Bachmann took federal money for her family farm, for her husband’s business, for anything she could get. That makes her more conservative than Palin? Your head must be really easy to screw with. What don’t you understand about 15 months before the election being too early to start running? What don’t you get about nothing important happening until 2012 January? You live in an instant society so you want instant politics, and unless the politician plays the game your way (she’ll lose if she does), you trash her, bitch, whine, and moan. Then you tout another RINO (Romney) and call yourself a “rightwingyahoo.” Damn straight you’re a yahoo; right wing, you’re not.

I’ve never really understood this argument… taking funds for which you have already paid taxes makes one unconservative?

If someone sticks you up at gunpoint for $50, and offers to give you $25 back, you’re really going to say no because of a principled opposition to robbery?

Wouldn’t it make more sense to take the $25 and continue to press charges for the other stolen $25.

How is this any different than collecting social security for which you have already paid while fighting to change social security?

Let Bachmann take her legitimate tax deductions just like everyone else while she fights to change the tax code… else you put her at a financial disadvantage campaigning against those who take the break but won’t change anything.

(I write officially campaigning, because she has been running since the day she formally resigned her position as Governor of Alaska in late July, 2009 and her unofficial campaign began with her “Game On” speech in Madison, WI on April, 2011.)

IMV yes and the announcement will happen sometime within the next 4 weeks.

P.S. Perry’s people have taken a book out of Bachmann’s effort and started a whisper campaign that “Sarah Palin is not running, Perry and Palin are friends and ultimately Palin will endorse Perry.” (Amazing how no one wants Sarah Palin to run, but everyone wants her endorsement.) Not going to happen, unless Perry wins the nomination, but that’s another story.

Wrong, John, I want her to run. The more who get in the race, and point out the move to socialism that this nation is facing under Democrat control of three of the four branches of government (I include the press in that list), the better.

Every candidate brings something to the table. Santorum on Iran was absolutely brilliant. Newt took on Chris Wallace, as well he should have. Americans need all the information, and fire power, they can muster.

I do find it a bit odd that even though Palin made an appearance at the Iowa straw vote (blown out of proportion by the press) and drew strong crowds, she did not pull in any write in votes. And when Sean Hannity (who loooooves him some Sarah Palin) asked the crowd if they would vote for Sarah there was a loud “NO”.

Actually, Palin was not in attendance at the Straw poll. She was in Illinois visiting Reagan’s boyhood home in Dixon and at his college in Eureka when the vote was taking place in Ames. Tony Lee from Human Events reports that the crowd behind Hannity that shouted “No” were supporters of other candidates who were bused in for Sean’s show……in other words, they had a vested interest to down play Palin entering the race. By the way….Palin won the “kernal poll” at the Iowa State Fair.

No write-in votes for Palin, ’cause she was not entering the Straw Poll (and knows how these “straw polls” can be manipulated – remember Paul’s “victory” at CPAC? His campaign paid the registration fee for all “his” Paul-bots to vote for him!! Probably bussed in a whole bunch to Ames for this latest exercise in futility, too!) – and her supporters are putting all their efforts into signing up volunteers and getting ready for the big keynote on Sept.3.

Excellent points, john.frank. In their rage to destroy her, the Left and their sick-o-phants in the DinosaurMedia, did Sarah Palin a favor: They vetted her. If Palin does run, there’ll probably will not be an “October Surpriser” on her. What’s more, these GOP Preidential candidates should be prepared to have their dirty laundry aired NOW and not later.

It was surprising to see Bachmann run for POTUS. Tammy Bruce at tammybruce.com thinks that Bachmann is a stalking horse for Romney. If that true, it wouldn’t be surprising to find that all her dough and backers go to Romney.

Bachmann is entirely without loyalty to anyone but herself and maybe her husband. Need Palin to help her get re-elected? Yup. Trash Palin with ‘Bachmann is like Palin, but with brains’ is a great way to repay that. Need Pawlenty to help her career, and say good things about him? Yup. Trash Pawlenty when she doesn’t need him anymore. It’s all about Michelle.

Bachmann is gone in a little while because she’s the GOP’s Obama. No executive experience, no ideas that she doesn’t copy from Palin, a slender grasp of facts, and a willingness to trash anyone who gets in her way.

It’s a shame, but I have to agree. The backstabbing and badmouthing of Palin by Bachmann’s people have to be with he approval. If she’s the nominee, I’ll vote for her, but, until then, I’ll prefer candidates who don’t practice a version of Obama’s “throw them under the bus” tactics.

Sarah Palin bashed the citizens of WHICH state? Since I’ve rarely – if ever – heard her bash anyone (except Odumbo), that charge/accusation was a surprise to me. But if true, of course, I’ll stand corrected.

Bachmann has never held an executive office ,has no leadership experience,and her service in the House has produced no legislation; Bachmann has a very thin political resume

Bachmann privately lobbied for stimulus funds for Minnesota and pork producers, according to recent media reports, sought spending earmarks that she now opposes and benefited personally from tens of thousands of dollars in federal funds for a family farm and counseling clinic owned by her husband, federal records show.

There is a distance between Bachmann’s campaign oratory and her actual conduct as a lawmaker.

I’m still of the opinion we should be promoting candidates from our field of exeprienced Republican GOVERNORS for a number of strategic reasons.

Though I’m not a personal fan of Palin, she has executive experience from managing an entire state. We keep indicting Democrats for peddling the most inexperienced person for the presidency. Yet segments in the Right are doing the same with Bachmann; a local rep. who wants to rule America from a church in Minnesota.

Still early to say, but if it comes down to… Palin, Romney, Perry, Huntsman.. I might pick Perry just going by the pulse in my office (a very liberal NYC ad agency) I was stunned to hear my co-workers, all registered democrats, admitting they won’t vote for Obama again…and they are ‘keeping an open mind’ with Perry and Romney.

That said, we need too get more governors into the mix. Where’s Gary Johnson, Mitch Daniels and Nikki Haley?

Since the Palin in or out meme keeps cropping up, I’ll repeat something I wrote earlier.

I think Palin decided to run a while ago. The present phase will end soon (She told Sky News in Iowa she has to announce in September – her words). Right now she is spending very little money, is not a target of attacks, has her freedom, she is getting an enormous return on investment of time and money spent, her organizations grow and self organize with very little cost to herself in time and money, her forays in and out generate enormous publicity and positive spin. (See the large number of positive reports from both the right and even, hold on to your hats, PMSNBC just from today). Knowledgeable commentators said that if Palin and her organization in Iowa had decided to win the straw poll they could have, they declined. They think winning the caucus is the prize. By the time she enters a decent chunk of the candidates will have all but eliminated themselves. (written before Pawlenty dropped out)

As a Palin supporter, whose main winnowing process is keeping track of the candidates for consideration if and only of Sarah decides herself not to run [her option, I want her too, but she has to decide] I have been more and more disappointed with Bachmann.

Her choice of Rollins, who is an Institutional Republican operative who hates Conservatives and the TEA Party was a bad sign from the git-go. His baggage, and his starting with attacks on Palin had to be with Bachmann’s knowledge and approval.

Second, she is the founder and chair of the TEA Party Caucus in the House. In the fight on the debt ceiling, one would expect that Bachmann would be in the forefront of the battle for fiscal sanity. I will give her credit for actually voting, herself, as she promised. That is a rarity. But where was the leadership? Where was the fight for our side? It gives every sign that she deliberately did not want to get crosswise with the Institutional Republican “Leadership” while they betrayed us. That raises the possibility of hands and feeding.

Now the game she played in Iowa pretty much takes her off the list. Once is chance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.

I’d hope that people would get their feelings and emotions out of this stuff. They’re politicians, not your buddies. They are vehicles for policy, that’s it. We need to be ruthlessly focused on finding the most conservative candidate possible who can beat Obama, not fighting over notions of loyalty to people we’ve never met and high school drama plays.

That isn’t the way I wish it was, but that’s how it is. We have the most leftwing administration in history wreaking havoc on the nation, and while personality and character are important qualities, there is not a single major candidate on the republican side who isn’t better than Obama on both those and policy.

I don’t care if these guys are going after one another with crowbars, I want the field winnowed through battle-testing, because the onslaught the eventual nominee will face in the general election will be unprecedented. I want their every political muscle and skill, even ruthlessness, on display, because that’s exactly what its going to take to win in 2012. And when I go to vote in the primaries, I want to know for damn sure that whoever it is I’m pulling the lever for can take a punch. And there’s only one way to find that out.

This is conventional political wisdom. It may get you an “A” in Machiavellian Political Thought but that is not what drives Conservatism. This thinking is more in line with modern liberal thinking (aka the Democratic Party). Who ever wins, rules. Everyone must follow or else.

Fortunately, Conservatism is not monolithic nor is it a Leviathan. Trent Lott used to say leading the GOP (and the Senate) was like ‘herding cats’. Whoever ends up being the GOP nominee will not be able to exert their will over the rest of the elected GOPers. Sure, they will try but I think the House GOPers remember 2006. Incrementalism works best but Bachmann will not follow that thinking. Then again, she leads the 60 member Tea Party Caucus; 2/3 of them voted for the Boehner bill. Who and what exactly does she lead?

Wasn’t it Reagan who once said, ‘I’d rather get 80% of what I want rather than go over the cliff flying my flag.’?
That is very good advice.

[…] All of this is relevant in a Republican primary, and one would expect candidates like Bachmann to capitalize them at some point in the race. Whether they work depends on whether the Tea Party/conservative base of the GOP values experience over political purity. Based on past experience, one would conclude that purity would win the day, which would seem to benefit Bachmann. However, Bachmann’s own vulnerabilities and her lack of a record, something that Tim Pawlenty brought up and which other candidates will bring up in the future, strikes me as being a bigger vulnerability among Republicans who, at heart, want to defeat Obama in November 2012. On that criteria alone, Perry seems to be in a far better position to win a General Election than Michele Bachmann ever will be, this seems even more true considering there are already conservatives saying that the Republican nominee needs to be “Anyone But Bachmann.” […]

I don’t like her religion. Or at least, I don’t like her putting morals into the equation. The government should be amoral. I fear that with her and Perry we are looking a making a choice between communism and theocracy. Either is bad and both get in out lives.

I am pulling for Paul. He is the only candidate that is a definite change from an overbearing government.

Now exactly where did that come from Cowboy. I believe people might call that a “straw man”. If you look back at a little history, you would see what religion has done. Try the 1890’s and the big protestant push that changed the way our government inserts itself in our lives. They are the reason you can’t go to Walgreens and get medication that you need. Instead, you have to ask the government for it. That is one little example. If you can’t see how that effects your freedom, then you are lost.

No straw man at all. You said, “I fear that with her and Perry we are looking a making a choice between communism and theocracy.” Theocracy is a word with a meaning, a political system with a definition. I’m wondering what political hallmarks of theocracy you think (or fear) they plan to institute, or at least set in motion. Incidentally, do you feel America prior to the 20th century, or even the 1860’s, was a theocracy, given its laws and culture were far more explicitly based on Biblical teachings, particularly in such private areas such as divorce, marriage, spousal relations, and sexual behavior?

If you know what you are talking about. Then you know the answer to your question is much more complicated than can be postulated on in a comment section. However, I don’t think you have any idea of the histroy yor are referring to. Get back to me when you do.

Cowboy,
If that is so then you are well aware of the toxic nature of an involved religious electorate. You would clearly have an idea of the fundamental changes in our freedom that have occurred in the name of religion and “morals”. You would know that many state and federal positions are held by “christians” who have a vendetta that does not limit them to the postulated nature of their assigned positions, ie many of these individuals wind up on pharmacy committees and make sure that doctors don’t give adequate drugs to cover a patient’s pain syndrome. This is a common problem over the last 20 years as these folks have risen to prominence. Most people are blissfully unaware of their actions, except for the people who hurt and the doctors that normally law abiding physicians that windup in jail by just doing their job.

But somehow I really don’t think you have such a degree, after all, it be be virtually worthless.

The deal purports to cut the rate of increase in government by reducing the percentage increase of a baseline 30% higher than 2007 spending. They locked in all the temporary recession spending into the baseline.

Professor: I agree entirely with your take on Bachmann. The day she unleashed Rollins was the last day she held any chance of winning. While I will not vote for Obama, there is no way I would support a Bachmann candidacy beyond showing up at the polls — and I don’t even think she will make it past the New Hampshire primary.

maybe bachmann won the hearts of some iowans, but i can’t see the country going for a cross between elizabeth dole and anita bryant. then again, i never thought that the country would go for a sleazy community organizer either so what do i know?

@sablegsd: mccotter absolutely should have been included in the debate. nobody (except for a suprisingly capable newt) would have had the same abililty to eschew campaign slogans in favor of intelligent extemperaneous speech and a wry sense of humor. he would have made the rest of the panel look like the bores and dimwits that they are. is that why he’s being ignored?

“It was bad enough that Bush was close to Norquist. There is no way the GOP can again nominate anyone who is so completely and utterly clueless about the fifth column within. Ten years after 9/11, can’t we nominate someone who can speak to the ominous threat posed by Islamic supremacists in this country?”

“Rick Perry must not be the Republican nominee. Rick Perry must not be President. Have we not had enough of this systemic sedition?”

[…] 2011 var addthis_product = 'wpp-261'; var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};From Prof. William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection: Michele Bachmann is entitled to run her campaign any way she wants, and using typical Ed Rollins […]

I feel the same way. Michele Bachmann never defended Sarah Palin against the attack she received from Ed Rollins. Which leaves me to believe that she sanctioned it. I lost total respect for her after that. Displayed a stunning lack of character. My motto is Palin or Bust. I will no longer vote for someone who I don’t believe in 100%. And Sarah Palin is the only one I feel that way about. She’s the only one I believe has the strength and courage to restore America back to her greatness. She’s got my vote locked up.